List Info

Thread: using MH is not a magic "re-use"




using MH is not a magic "re-use"
user name
2006-11-14 05:04:05
 > > => The interface between the LFN and the MR is
out of scope of both
 > >  nemo and monami6. But assuming that the MR is
somehow informed of
 > >  the LFN's choice,
 > 
 > How?  There isn't any way for LFNs to inform MR about
delegating
 > authorization.

=> Huh? What authorisation does the LFN delegate for the
MR to send a BU
for the entire prefix, including its own address???

 > > Of course the MR is authorised
 > 
 > For MR to be authorized do flow bindings for the
entire prefix it
 > would need a mechanism whereby all LFNs in that
network authorize the
 > MR do these flow bindings.  

=> Please answer my question above. 

 > > to send BUs for the entire prefix, which includes
all addresses, so
 > >  yes it can send a BU for a single address.
 > 
 > I don't get that.  NEMOv6 BUs are not per-LFN, they're

 > either explicit
 > (prefixes) or implicit (all hosts that HA's routing
table decides).
 > LFN doesn't inform MR neither about BUs nor about its
flows.

=> But the MR sends the BU for the entire prefix anyway,
regardless of
what the LFN thinks. I'm surprised you're bringing this up,
how is the
MR authorised to send a BU for everyone or inject routes for
a prefix
that includes all MNNs not just the LFN?? 

Hesham

_______________________________________________
Monami6 mailing list
Monami6ietf.org
https:
//www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/monami6
[1]

about | contact  Other archives ( Real Estate discussion Medical topics )